[flagged]
Trying to characterise it as a financier might seem a bit silly afterwards....
>Most other newspapers in Britain lose money. Many are funded by wealthy individuals whose motivation is influence rather than getting rich. The Scott Trust is, perhaps, less likely to be capricious or unreliable than a wealthy individual.
It's certainly possible to tell the difference between Fox News and Breitbart, or CNN and The Guardian.
Of course being completely unbiased is impossible, but it's a goal work towards, not something to give up on by default.
I guess we are reading different Guardian's. If I go to the Guardian web site and search for "corbyn", the leader of the Labour party, #1, #2 and #4 are articles implying, or saying, that he is anti-semitic. The Guardian has been bashing Corbyn and the Labour party for years. If the Guardian is "left wing", what is Corbyn and Labour?
Also the left - George Galloway, Dennis Skinner etc., is pro-Brexit and has been for years. Corbyn is probably privately pro-Brexit, but has to stay in the middle of the debate so that the Tom Watson wing of the party doesn't bolt. The Guardian is firmly anti-Brexit other than one-off op-eds once in a while.
The most read newspapers in the UK are right wing.